I already explained this many times. Even if taste is subjective, when the pricepoint is set by the business, it's based on heuristics and objective measures of demand in the industry.

At the moment, there is growing demand in the games I mentioned in OP, and it matters to me how Nintendo is reacting to that. Though many people have bought NSMB Wii, with the degrading success of the newer entries some of our suspicions are being proven correct, that the price truly wasn't right in the first place. You don't know how much you like a gift until it's unwrapped, that's the principle behind this.

If it's too much of a hassle to explain it's better not to post at all imho. Unless you have a point that you can defend, it's best not to try.

I didn't say the ideas here were crazy, I said to have to be told how this basic aspect of how the market works is crazy, it is like having to tell a child when they take the legs off a spider it dies. People pay what they consider a product to be worth to them, every Apple product is testiment to this.

I understand, but when 2D games were not selling much in generations prior, and when now they found a massive boost chiefly thanks to the family appeal of the Wii, and when mobile and DD games are showing competing value, it's something to keep an eye out for.

I don't need to be explained that people buy what they perceive to have value, but you can also be sure that the popularity of an item can lead to sales that may not have been natural and could lead to a sentiment of regret. It is possible that the casual/Wii/retro offerings by Nintendo are leading to that due to the prices set on these offerings and the emergence of new offerings that are made at a more "reasonable" price. It's like meeting a girl that is 10 times more awesome than your favorite ex-girlfriend, though at the time you would have given her the world. It's a poor analogy but I'm trying to say something that to me is "obvious" and it feels crazy to me to have to explain it to you and some others here, to be completely blunt.

The answer to the question is a "yes". Mostly "Yes". They are flagship games for Nintendo and do not need to sell them at a lower price because they're still selling very decently at a fast pace. And yes, their value and replay value are huge.

Sometimes, HappyD, I think you are too controversial.

NintendoPie said: Sometimes, HappyD, I think you are too controversial.

;) I had so much fun playing LoL yesterday for free, and watching my roomie play Trine today it really hit me.... Do Nintendo games, honestly, have that much more entertainment value than  Trine? Nintendo fans aside, from a general point of view, is it true? I know many cases where a film may be very very popular, but in the end it is really, intrinsically, not so good. McDonalds is hugely popular, but there are so many more delicious foods out there that it makes you wonder what's wrong with some of us. I understand that retro Nintendo games have their appeal, but I'm not sure, intrinsically, how justifiable their markup is, and that's an honest question.

Some of you see me as just another member tring to get hits, but this is a question I was honestly asking myself this morning, and I would have been ok if this thread had had 10 replies.

If they sell good why would you lower the price?

This argument has various flaws as some of you may as well say that because some 2d fighting games can be downloaded for cheap SF4 should have been cheap on release as well when that's not how things work. People have gone over quality being down to the individual and market so the's no need to touch that, I personally find the first party offering far superior to the listed alternatives in both design and quality with only Trine standing out some what. To bring up such an argument for a thread you'll have to do a more direct comparison then simply use your opinion on value and quality and compare prices, for example NSMBU has MP for 5 people, challenge modes and about 10hr minimum playtime with extras unlocking afterward, I hear one of the games listed barely has 2hrs for starters which highlights the flaws in the format you've chosen for criticism.

There are fair criticisms to OP it isn't immaculate. An example that drives the point is League of Legends. The game is free to play and has an immense following. I would be hard-pressed to find that at 1$ it would not sell. Though it's true that the cheaper the game, the cheaper the price of admission (to the new IP), but these games are growing in popularity and will create low-end disruption over the next few years.

Street Fighter IV was, visually speaking, much deeper than NSMB, and I can only guess that it required much more work. If you play SFIV, you'll notice the detail in the characters is almost perfect.

Quality over quantity. Limbo was new, interesting, innoavite, and highly immersive. NSMBU was just the same crap that I've been playing for over 20 years. I payed 15$ for Limbo for the same reason I payed 60$ for Portal 2. Some games don't need to be 15 hours long to justify full price.